"MoM of the world. The mighty United States."

As I stated. The united states is the mother of the world. We over see everything in the world. If someone does not play nice mommy steps in and fixes the problem.That is why the U.S. has so many military men stationed all over the place and why we donate money to struggling nations without even helping our own struggling nation.

The united nations is a joke. They are supposed to keep the peace in the world and make sure everybody plays nice. Instead they take their huge paychecks and do nothing. They pretend they are important and that they help out in the world. They don't.

So here is the discussion. Is the United states the mother of the world. Or is the united nations actually doing it's job?

I live in the US, and frankly, this whole "land of the free" and "freedom of speech" bullshit died out years ago. It's all shit.

Then again the "Loli = CP" thing has pissed me off, so that's a biased judgment.

Americans are warlike people, this role gives us a reason to fight.
On the other side of the same coin, our leadership likes money. This gives us a pretence to fight.

You make the U.S. sound like an ever benevolent mediator. Hardly. The U.S. only steps in if it has a vested interest, justified or not. There's a reason why there's an anti-American sentiment around the globe.


The United Nations is only as powerful as the consensus and actions of its member nations. You seem to overestimate their power. Even so, I do feel that the U.N. does give a concerted effort to maintaining global peace. They don't just "take their huge paychecks and do nothing". You're mixing them up with Wall Street bankers.

Nah the US just goes into place whenever it wants. Sure it gets hated on but the US doesn't care. All it cares about is the illusion that they can do whatever they want.

The US does take on a rather 'motherly' role. However, not without something to gain/prevent. The US will help struggling nations to either improve its image around the world, or gain another ally. Similarly, the US will only attack another country if it sees it as a threat to its own existence.

As for the United Nations, yes it has failed and is rather pointless. It was created to prevent wars, but it stood silent while terrorization spread. The UN ignores sex crimes by its "blue-helmets", and enables terrorism; so in the end it's failed.

NATO invaded Yugoslavia to end ethnic cleansing---There was no UN
The U.S. invaded Afghanistan after 9/11---There was no UN
Saddam Hussein violated 17 U.N. resolutions---The U.N. was asked to join the war in Iraq: The US invaded---There was no U.N.
Libya bombed a discotheque in Berlin killing Americans---There was no U.N.
And Iran funds Hamas and attacked the US in the seventies---There was no U.N.

The U.N. has become a complete and utter disgrace and needs to be either eliminated, or fixed.

If the U.S. is the mom, corporations are her children. like any good mother, she will kill anything that threatens her off-spring.

America isn't the mother of the world. The government of America has taken an interventionist foreign policy mentality. Neoconservatives support this ideology because to them, democratic countries rarely declare war on one another.



John McGowan once stated (paraphrased) that Neoconservatives are actively trying to build an American Empire but, not an overt one like the United Kingdom of years past. This Empire would be more subtle or more of an economic empire.

Edit:For those unaware the Neoconservatives are considered "false conservatives" by the rest of the conservative movement ranging from some right leaning Libertarians(Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Alan Greenspan) to Paleo-conservatives (Alex Jones). Neocons tend to support abortion,the "welfare state" and support Free markets in rhetoric only. Look up "Bush Doctrine" if you want more information.

Is the United nations doing it's job? No, the United Nations is a miasma of corruption and impotence. The U.N. can't come to an agreement on anything. Iran and North Korea's Nuclear programs are a couple recent examples of how the U.N. (more specifically the security council) can't come to any strong agreements. America has been trying to push for sanctions on Iran for months if not years and we essentially have no results. With countries such as Russia and China using their veto power to prevent any sanctions that would endanger their interests in Iran (or North Korea). If we expand our outlook we can see that nearly all U.N. resolutions are optional with only the U.S. willing to take up the role of enforcing these resolutions but, only if the resolutions benefit America.

The corruption in the bureaucracy also prevents the U.N. from acting as an effective mediator. Money earmarked for the Haitian relief effort went missing

List of U.N. corruption I came across

I basically sit SD around waiting for Penguin to post stuff, I enjoy reading it.



Anyway, I'm not a big fan of calling the US the worlds mother in that sense, like all the countries are her unruly children.

But it's true in the sense that the UN (basically the bastard child) just sits on it's ass until the mother comes along and gives it a talking to for being so lazy and useless. Get out of the United States basement, and go be somebody! You can do it if you try!

But nah, I doubt it'll amount to anything, if the nations with the most weight behind their votes (US, Russia, China, UK etc) never agree on what to do, then what's the point of it? As the only result is a waste of ink on newspapers reporting that nothing new has changed.

That's why it seems the US acts 'motherly' to the world at large, the UN doesn't agree with what we want to do? Fuck it, we have the ability to go do it our selves.

I agree about the UN. It's a joke, but I kinda wish the US would take care of its own problems first, instead butting into someone else's business. Since it's gonna be us taxpayers that foot the bill! That my two cents.

With great power comes great responsiblity :)
Plus there is always going to be a top dog in the world. If it isn't the US, it is going to be another country. Someone is always going to be leading, and people always despise there leaders after a time.

And people talk about the US taking care of its own problems first like the government should just be handing out checks to everyone who doesn't have two cars and a HDTV. It takes a few million to send food aid to millions starving people, it takes billions to give everyone healthcare.

As for the UN, I think us Americans hate it because it puts us on a level playing field with every other country. It irks us because depsite the fact other countries may be ran by Dictators or ran by theology and only support the UN in a minimal capacity, we provide huge sums of money and intelligence for a body that helps every other nation but us.

I don't think Americans should ever apologize though, no people give more of their time and their money to help others in need, even when those people want to kill us.

Sure America is the world's mom...

...if under mom, you mean your "Momma" the fat and psychotic bitch who runs the brothel and sacks her pimps on your if your don't put out.

Here's the real story to what "charity" the world gets from the USA:
http://www.gfip.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=299


...and here is how she takes care of average Joe:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/apr2010/mass-a21.shtml

For all her "mothering" she's one vindicative bitch.

I don't get what one evil dude who is probably going to jail has anything to with anything really regarding your second link...

But as for the first, the illict flow of funds (wut? specifics pls?) doesn't reflect the money that comes from the america people's pockets, directly, towards helping their fellow man.

Practice reading comprehension.

The first article is about the cash flow from Africa - the thing is even with all the aid going there, more leaves the continent through various means.

The second is about how a typical company handles its workers: abused and endangered. Several miners died in a safety related incident - the company was fined several times for not following regulations - then they forbid the workers from attending the funerals.

Loved how you used the Ben Parker quote from Spider Man!

First - so Africa's inablity to maintain positive flow is the fault of the US?

Second - Once again, So? Are yo implying that a mine, which is ran by someone who is facing prosecution and scrutiny right now in the media, is reflective of the working conditions of the entire United States ? That if there was a tradgey at every other company they would refuse to let their workers attend funerals as well? What is the point you are making? Because this ISN'T how a typical company handles its workers - if it was then it wouldn't be news worthy would it? There wouldn't be upset people since the behavior is typical of greedy US employers right?

Except it isn't typical, and the US enjoy work enviroments VASTLY improved over the rest of the world - not even taking into account the un-industrailized societies.

I yet contend. I agree that the united states take matter as interventionists, and usually only if they lose out if they don't, but then they go way overboard. Look at iraq. Our original plan was to get rid of terrorists and be done. Now we are vested in them to make them a min-U.S. We set up the government, we keep the peace, and we determine exactly how good they are doing.

Also the corruption point is just like i said. The U.N is a joke. They don't help out as they should because they can't/won't. Yes I'm sure most people who run U.N operations are people who like the paycheck and keep quiet as to said corruption.

The U.S try's to push other country's into what the U.S wants. This is what has caused terrorism and anti-american sentiments.

I believe that refutes(to a degree) most of your very important arguments.

No. The original plan called for removing Saddam Hussein since he assisted in the creation and amassing of WMDs and finding and neutralizing said WMDs.

Turned out to be false. Saddam was executed anyway for war crimes. Crimes he did commit, but under which several other US backed dictators could have been executed.

Then instead appointing a new governor or just letting the locals handle politics on their own, the US forced a puppet of their own choosing onto the Iraqis and proceeded to economically rape the country.

Right now Iraq is on the verge of falling apart and there are several factions fighting for power and mortality rates have rocketed through the roof. Their economy is still in the death-grip of a foreign power and capital is being pumped out at hyper speeds.

You can speak about all the hearts and minds or other humanitarian efforts the GIs do - which they indeed *do* - in the end you gotta agree that the locals got the short end of the stick and it's the US' fault. Getting to put a mark next to a corrupt politician on a paper doesn't seem like a fair trade...

Democracy takes a lot more than merely voting. It takes civic tradition and the ability of the people to support themselves, not to depend on local lords or gangsters for protection (from the warlords themselves!) and finally the ability to identify with the representatives they're to vote for... and more importantly the representative has to actually do something for his electorate.

A lot of that is missing in Iraq. While the trappings and formalities of democracy was established its a hollow construct with no solid matter inside, built on quicksand that will swallow it whole once the US pulls out.

These issues are not insurmountable, but they got a whole lot worse since the US started. As is it will definitely take years to get anywhere as the war turned into CIW, and CIW can take decades to work even if it's well done. However as far as I'm aware most of the armed forces and especially the political will behind them is in denial. Petraeus finally implemented some CIW policies but the establishment has yet to realize what those mean and catch up with it.

CIW is not warfare. It's policing, it's hardcore propaganda, doing it good actually requires anti-democratic measures and a hard stomach for you're bound to do nasty stuff.